|
the blockade would be to kill the population's will to resist, not to make sure the tanks and APCs run dry. they don't want to have to take cities militarily
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 01:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 20:46 |
|
|
Ukraine at least is a breadbasket and can get fuel and supplies to equip its military, Taiwan would be completely cut off. It would be in a far worse position, it wouldn’t be sustainable. The USN basically has to take the entire combined might of the PLA in its own backyard.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 01:27
|
|
|
indigi posted:the blockade would be to kill the population's will to resist, not to make sure the tanks and APCs run dry. they don't want to have to take cities militarily as a strategy that has a pretty pathetic track record, historically
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 01:27
|
|
|
causing widespread civilian misery and uniting the population against their interests is a pretty american move so i'm pretty sure china's not going to do it, thankfully
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 01:28
|
|
|
well yeah, any military solution to reunification has a pretty terrible prognosis in the short and medium term. it's why China would rather wait it out and why the US doesn't want to let them
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 01:29
|
|
|
Given China's large diesel electric submarine fleet I'm guessing any 'successful ' plan the USA has cooked up involves a reliance on ground based air.indigi posted:"hundreds of aircraft" would be existentially devastating to US force projection especially considering half our fifth generation fleet is grounded at any given time The airforce has over 5000 aircraft. The navy has over 1500. That "hundreds of aircraft" is presumably not all fighters.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 01:51
|
|
|
Hmm if only there was a way to guarantee Taipei fights a lost war essentially on the US’ behalf, at the cost of the destruction of their nation… if only there were freedom loving people with English signs and an iconic colour to demand a change in government in Taiwan…
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 02:14
|
|
|
Weka posted:Given China's large diesel electric submarine fleet I'm guessing any 'successful ' plan the USA has cooked up involves a reliance on ground based air. a bunch of the projected aircraft losses are just the expected attrition from that many V-22 Osprey sorties
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 02:27
|
|
|
i think it's cool to fashion your wargames around the premise that you are going to win
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 02:33
|
|
|
Egg Moron posted:i think it's cool to fashion your wargames around the premise that you are going to win At RIMPAC one year Canadian troops did an opposed beach landing on American LCAC and lol alright, sure, that's what's going to happen. Not the port of Victoria getting put out of action on the day the war starts or God knows what else.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 02:43
|
|
|
atelier morgan posted:nah the US navy still real loving big If they would be replaced. Assuming the US doesn't deicde to end the world through nuclear hell fire after being embarrassed like that the US grip on world affairs is broken as ships and planes from other regions have to be shifted around to cover the gap in the pacific which only makes the US weaker over all. You'd think in a sane a society that would lead to some reforms or at attempt to rachet down the tension, but if Empires were capbale of that self reflection they wouldn't fall apart in the first place
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 07:56
|
|
|
Weka posted:Given China's large diesel electric submarine fleet I'm guessing any 'successful ' plan the USA has cooked up involves a reliance on ground based air. The issue with that is American air bases would also be targeted and China has AD platforms that cover all of Taiwan. Basically, the USAF has to chew through the entire Chinese military. Stealth may not be a factor as well since Beijing has been investing data linked high intensity radar drones and other systems to make sure they have a 3d map of the battle space. China still doesn’t want to get into a war if they can help it but I don’t think they are going to play the fool like a certain other country. (Also, the polls for the greens seem to be rather soft.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 10:41
|
|
|
The American public would lose their goddamn minds and demand nuclear war after the first carrier sunk imo
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 12:59
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:The American public would lose their goddamn minds and demand nuclear war after the first carrier sunk imo good thing no one in power cares what the American public thinks
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 13:53
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:The American public would lose their goddamn minds and demand nuclear war after the first carrier sunk imo I don't think the american public cares about taiwan or china at all beyond having an enemy to hate and they also don't go crazy for wars where the enemy can fight back. They love cold wars, proxy wars, and committing genocide against what they perceive as defenseless countries but I don't think they're clamoring to get nuked. The media would be begging for armageddon, though
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 14:00
|
|
|
Hatebag posted:I don't think the american public cares about taiwan or china at all beyond having an enemy to hate and they also don't go crazy for wars where the enemy can fight back. They love cold wars, proxy wars, and committing genocide against what they perceive as defenseless countries but I don't think they're clamoring to get nuked. The media would be begging for armageddon, though Does the American public understand that other countries can nuke them back though?
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 14:02
|
|
|
genericnick posted:Does the American public understand that other countries can nuke them back though? extremely no
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 14:06
|
|
|
genericnick posted:Does the American public understand that other countries can nuke them back though? Idk, they might think the chinese nukes are made of cardboard or that a bucket of cheesy broccoli will see them through the apocalypse. There's no telling with these fuckers
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 14:07
|
|
|
genericnick posted:Does the American public understand other countries?
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 14:29
|
|
|
genericnick posted:Does the American public understand?
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 14:30
|
|
|
genericnick posted:Does the American public understand that other countries can nuke them back though? Going by the response of so many Liberals clamoring for war with Russia, they honestly think America is histories protagonist and that somehow in the event of nuclear war we will be fine and only our enemies turned to ash and shadow
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 14:56
|
|
|
genericnick posted:Does the American public understand that other countries can nuke them back though? The same media that tells them fighting wars is the best also tells them that other countries' nukes don't work and a little nuclear war would actually be fine and good
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 15:02
|
|
|
genericnick posted:Does the American public understand that other countries can nuke them back though? My thinking goes (roughly) like this: The American response to mass casualties since at least 1991 has been to freak the gently caress out and demand some kind of massive retribution. A handful of Americans were killed in Mogadishu and the Americans killed at least 1000 Somalis in the Mogadishu Mile, and remember that the public demanded that they do more. Some contractors were killed in Fallujah, and they sent in the Marines, when the Marines took casualties, they just flattened the city. Against a peer, my concern is that that impulse still exists. Well, if America is getting punched around in a conventional war, how do they disproportionately "punish" the enemy for their temerity? The Nimitz Class Carriers have a crew of what, 5000 people? So, the loss of two of those would be ten thousand Americans killed in a day. Incidentally, this is why I think any proposal to play games like send the 101st to Odessa if the Russias break through is reckless in the extreme. America, and this might be me stereotyping, does not "take it on the chin" very well. So far, they haven't really had to. The Marines absolutely destroyed Hue after Tet, for example. Whatever the upset or setback is, the Americans have, to date, been able to pile on more firepower, both to restore the military situation and imo placate the public. In a war with China, this option does not really exist short of nuclear weapons and I can't see the American public quietly accepting tens of thousands of casualties to maintain the status quo, with China "unpunished". In a more historical sense, Great Powers in the Victorian period responded to any embarrassment with incredible bloodletting. The harrowing of the Indian countryside after the Sepoy Mutiny, the burning of the Winter Palace after the Second Opium War, ravaging China after the Boxer Rebellion, the destruction of Tibetan monasteries during the Tibet expedition, the fighting in the Sudan after the murder of Gordon, I could go on. Frosted Flake has issued a correction as of 15:13 on Jan 12, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 15:03
|
|
|
Don't forget that the British reaction to losing the first Afghan war was to march back to Kabul, burning everything in the path, dynamite half the city, and then gently caress off back to India to let their puppet get murdered
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 15:26
|
|
|
Frosted Flake posted:Some contractors were killed in Fallujah, and they sent in the Marines, when the Marines took casualties, they just flattened the city. they're gonna name a Navy ship over this poo poo!!!
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 15:44
|
|
|
we shoulda nuked Grenada
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 17:27
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:The issue with that is American air bases would also be targeted and China has AD platforms that cover all of Taiwan. Basically, the USAF has to chew through the entire Chinese military. Stealth may not be a factor as well since Beijing has been investing data linked high intensity radar drones and other systems to make sure they have a 3d map of the battle space. I think the American assumption is that we can go to war with China over Taiwan but also that China won’t attack US military assets outside the direct zone of conflict out of fear of the US killing millions of Chinese citizens as retaliation. We get to have our cake and eat it too because we’re willing to commit the largest mass murder in human history.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 18:17
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:I think the American assumption is that we can go to war with China over Taiwan but also that China won’t attack US military assets outside the direct zone of conflict out of fear of the US killing millions of Chinese citizens as retaliation. We get to have our cake and eat it too because we’re willing to commit the largest mass murder in human history.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 18:20
|
|
|
Good thing nobody looked at the consequences of the soviet union willingly dissolving and made no conclusions from it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 18:46
|
|
|
The U.S. Navy Submarine Force Could Sink The Chinese Fleet And Save Taiwan, But At The Cost Of A Quarter Of Its Boats Same wargames apparently predict we'll win at the cost of a quater of the American subfleet. Just the sub fleet
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 18:47
|
|
|
KomradeX posted:The U.S. Navy Submarine Force Could Sink The Chinese Fleet And Save Taiwan, But At The Cost Of A Quarter Of Its Boats Very lucky for the Americans that the scenario premise is set up so that the US can get all but 1 or 2 of their submarines to the pacific in time to stop the invasion.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 18:53
|
|
|
cat botherer posted:Hey, that kind of thinking worked with Reagan and the Soviets. during the cold war ufos allegedly hosed with american nuclear missiles by turning off their ability to launch on the soviet side to scare them the ufos turned the missiles on
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 18:58
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Very lucky for the Americans that the scenario premise is set up so that the US can get all but 1 or 2 of their submarines to the pacific in time to stop the invasion. You'd think for a wargame we set up to win at we'd do a bit better cause they keep saying we kept Taiwan "free" butit really looks like the end of this war is the destruction of its ability to control large swarths of the globe
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 19:01
|
|
|
isn't america gonna reach a local(lol) minimum in terms of force ratio against china very soon
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 19:03
|
|
|
Wheeee posted:during the cold war ufos allegedly hosed with american nuclear missiles by turning off their ability to launch
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 20:06
|
|
|
Stairmaster posted:isn't america gonna reach a local(lol) minimum in terms of force ratio against china very soon The date that keeps getting bandied around as when America will have it's advantage back is 2027, this scenario is set in 2026. This date is crucial to the war gaming because success for the USA relies heavily on the LRASM, current stocks of which are low and projected stocks in 2026 are 450. Predictions of Chinese capabilities are significantly guesswork, they used Google Earth to esstimate the number of underground airfields. I'm going to do some more reading on the estimates they're using for Chinese force numbers. One section of the report which stood out to me is the following. quote:Focus on Taiwan. I think if China invades Taiwan the Suez will be blocked by ship/s running aground. It's even possible the Evergrande doing so was a test. Ardennes posted:The issue with that is American air bases would also be targeted and China has AD platforms that cover all of Taiwan. Basically, the USAF has to chew through the entire Chinese military. Stealth may not be a factor as well since Beijing has been investing data linked high intensity radar drones and other systems to make sure they have a 3d map of the battle space. Yeah the report has most planes being lost on the ground. The USA's operations are all mostly focused on stand off strikes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 22:24
|
|
|
Weka posted:Yeah the report has most planes being lost on the ground. The USA's operations are all mostly focused on stand off strikes. stand off strikes from what? anything within standoff strike range will be in range of Chinese assets including anti-ship ballistic missiles.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 22:45
|
|
|
I think China will just ask bees and mosquitos for help and that'll be that
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2023 23:02
|
|
|
Weka posted:The date that keeps getting bandied around as when America will have it's advantage back is 2027, this scenario is set in 2026. This date is crucial to the war gaming because success for the USA relies heavily on the LRASM, current stocks of which are low and projected stocks in 2026 are 450. The issue in that case though is that the PLAAF has its own long range stand off missiles, so if hard to see where the Americans have an advantage. Also, most of the US sub fleet is geared to countering the Russians and really can’t be pulled back without surrendering the arctic if not the North Sea.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 00:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 20:46 |
|
|
https://twitter.com/zhao_dashuai/status/1610843553927942145 finally australia will have an answer to the papua new guinean long range artillery that threatens their continent
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2023 00:14
|
|
